The Contribution of Key Stakeholders and Funding Bodies in the Heritage-Led Regeneration Process: The Case of the Walled City of Nicosia

Year 2023, , 947 - 968, 16.12.2023

Şimal Kesepara , Aliye Menteş

https://doi.org/10.30785/mbud.1353001

Abstract

The availability of and eligibility for funding, and the engagement of key stakeholders are important factors in the progress and outcomes of the heritage-led regeneration of cultural heritage. In Cyprus, in the Walled City of Nicosia, there has been an ongoing process of heritage-led regeneration since two decades. The island’s political issues have affected the regeneration process in different ways, especially as regards funding the conservation of cultural heritage. The main aim of this paper is to identify key funding bodies and resources in the conservation of cultural heritage, and to investigate their contributions through selected key stakeholders during the heritage-led regeneration process in the Walled City of Nicosia (northern part). The research adopts a case study approach and investigates these issues through 15 projects in the Selimiye Quarter because public space projects are dense in this area. The research reveals that implementation and management are two important factors in the success of the regeneration process and its outcomes.

Keywords

Heritage-led urban regeneration, stakeholders, heritage management, funding bodies, Walled City of Nicosia

Ethical Statement

The article complies with national and international research and publication ethics. Ethics Committee approval was not required for the research study.

Thanks

The authors appreciate the documentation share of the stakeholders and funding bodies and thank TRNC Department of Antiquities and Museum, Foundation of Evkaf, Nicosia Turkish Municipality, TRNC Ministry of Tourism and Environment, the UNDP, the Chamber of Architects and the Town Planning Department. The authors also appreciate the proofreading of the manuscript by Dr. Helen Phillips (A to Z Proofreading, UK). This article was produced after the successful completion of the Master’s Thesis: ‘The Investigation of the Contribution of Key Stakeholders and Funding Bodies to the Process of Heritage-Led Urban Regeneration in the Walled City of Nicosia (Northern Part)’ on 27.01.2021 by Şimal Kesepara under the supervision of Assist. Prof. Dr. Aliye Menteş, European University of Lefke, Institute of Graduate Studies and Research, Department of Architecture. The article complies with national and international research and publication ethics. Ethics Committee approval was not required for the study.

Miras Destekli Yenileme Sürecinde Temel Paydaşların ve Fon Sağlayan Kurumların Katkıları: Lefkoşa Surlar İçi Örneği

Abstract

Finansmanın mevcudiyeti ve finansmana uygunluk ile kilit paydaşların katılımı, kültürel mirasın miras odaklı yenilenmesinin ilerlemesinde ve sonuçlarında önemli faktörlerdir. Kıbrıs'ta, Lefkoşa Surlar İçi’nde, yirmi yıldan beri miras odaklı bir yenilenme süreci devam etmektedir. Adanın siyasi sorunları, özellikle kültürel mirasın korunmasının finansmanı konusunda, yenilenme sürecini farklı şekillerde etkilemiştir. Bu makalenin temel amacı, kültürel mirasın korunmasında kilit finansman kurumlarını ve kaynaklarını belirlemek ve Lefkoşa Surlar İçi’ndeki (kuzey) miras odaklı yenilenme süreci sırasında seçilmiş kilit paydaşlar aracılığıyla bunların katkılarını araştırmaktır. Araştırma vaka çalışması yaklaşımını benimseyerek, kamusal alan projelerinin bu alanda yoğun olması nedeniyle Selimiye Mahallesi'ndeki 15 proje üzerinden bu konuları araştırıyor. Araştırma, dönüşüm sürecinin ve sonuçlarının başarısında uygulama ve yönetimin iki önemli faktör olduğunu ortaya koyuyor.

Keywords

Miras odaklı kentsel yenileme, paydaşlar, miras yönetimi, fon sağlayan kurumlar, Lefkoşa Surlar İçi

References

• Akkar, Z. M. (2006). Kentsel dönüșüm üzerine Batı’daki kavramlar, tanımlar, süreçler ve Türkiye. Planlama, 2, 29-38. Access Address (10.02.2022): https://www.researchgate.net/publication/345433721_Kentsel_donusum_uzerine_Bati'daki_kavramlar_tanim lar_surecler_ve_Turkiye
• Couch, C. (1990). Urban renewal theory and practice. London: Red Globe Press.
• Court, S. & Wijesuriya, G. (2015). People-centred approaches to the conservation of cultural heritage: living heritage. Rome: International Centre for the Study of the Preservation and Restoration of Cultural Property (ICCROM). Access Address (20.07.2023): https://www.iccrom.org/sites/default/files/PCA_Annexe-2.pdf
• Çakır, S. & Sağıroğlu Demirci, Ö. (2021). Sürdürülebilir turizm planlaması yoluyla inebolu kültürel mirasının korunmasına yönelik bir araştırma. Journal of Architectural Sciences and Applications, 6 (2), 586-606. Online ISSN: 2548-0170. Access Address (06.10.2023): https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download/article-file/1845267
• Dawabsheh, M. (2017). A National Treasury of Cultural Heritage. Access Address (11.12.2021): https://www.ps.undp.org/content/papp/en/home/presscenter/articles/2017/07/01/a-national-treasury-of- cultural-heritage-.html
• Doratlı, N. (2005). Revitalizing historic urban quarters: A model for determining the most relevant strategic approach. European Planning Studies, 13(5), 749-772. DOI:10.1080/09654310500139558, Access Address (10 January 2022).
• EU. (2019). Urban Agenda for the EU. Brussels: European Union. Access Address (11.12.2021): https://commission.europa.eu/eu-regional-and-urban-development/topics/cities-and-urban- development/urban-agenda-eu_en
• European Commission. (2019). European Framework for Action on Cultural Heritage. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.
• European Commission. (2019). Directorate-General for Education, Youth, Sport and Culture, European framework for action on cultural heritage, Publications Office. Access Address (14.12.2021): https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2766/949707
• European Commission. (2003). Rehabilitation of Alba Iulia’s urban heritage transforms the city and its economy. Access Address (14.12.2021): https://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/en/projects/romania/rehabilitation-of-alba-iulias-urban-heritage- transforms-the-city-and-its-economy
• European Commission. (2005). Objective 1 Programme fot Andalusia. Access Address (14.12.2021): https://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/en/atlas/programmes/2000-2006/spain/objective-1-programme-for- andalusia
• European Commission. (2010). Revitalisation and Adaptation of Shengjul (Ghulshen) Hamam. Access Address (14.12.2021): https://eeas.europa.eu/archives/delegations/the_former_yugoslav_republic_of_macedonia/documents/eu _the_former_yugoslav_republic_of_macedonia/pf_1_4_2010.pdf
• European Commission. (2013). Building the “good city” in the South of Europe. Access Address (14.12.2021): https://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/en/projects/best-practices/Espa%C3%83%C2%B1a/2661
• European Commission. (2019). European Union. Access Address (14.12.2021): https://ec.europa.eu/culture/policies/regulatory-framework
• Gürdallı, H., Kızılduman, B., Gündüz, N., Uluğ, E., Feridun, İ., Reis, E. & Davulcu, H. (2019). Kuzey Kıbrıs’ta tarihsel süreç içerisinde kültürel mirasın, koruma bilincinin ve yasaların gelişimi: ilgili kurum, kuruluş ve mevzuat. In: Kuzey Kıbrıs’ta Planlama ve Koruma Yönetimi Kurultayı, Lefke, KKTC, 31 October – 01 November 2019. European University of Lefke, unpublished congress paper.
• Hall, T. & Hubbard, P. (1996). The entrepreneurial city: new urban politics, new urban geographies? Progress in Human Geography, 20(2), 153-174.
• Hoşkara, Ş. Ö. & Doratlı, N. (2007). A critical evaluation of the issue of “conservation of the cultural heritage” in North Cyprus. Cyprus Review, 24(1), 849-872.
• ICOMOS. (1987). Charter for the Conservation of Historic Towns and Urban Areas Washington Charter. Washington: ICOMOS. Access Address (12.10.2020): https://www.icomos.org/images/DOCUMENTS/Charters/towns_e.pdf
• ICOMOS. (1994). The Nara Document on Authenticity. Japan: UNESCO, ICCROM and ICOMOS. https://www.icomos.org/en/charters-and-texts/179-articles-en-francais/ressources/charters-and- standards/386-the-nara-document-on-authenticity-1994
• INHERIT. (2007). Investing in Heritage - A Guide to Successful Urban Regeneration, Norwich: European Association of Historic Towns and Regions. Access Address (12.10.2020): http://www.historic-towns.org/wp- content/uploads/2018/09/Inherit-complete-doc-final-version-pdf-Layout-1-1.pdf
• INHERIT. (2019). Heritage Strategies in Small and Medium - Sized European Cities Alba Iulia, Romania. Access Address (11.12.2021): https://urbact.eu/sites/default/files/alba-iulia-oif-final.pdf
• Jacobs, B. & Dutton, C. (2000). Social and Community Issues. In: Roberts, P. and Sykes. H. (eds) Urban Regeneration A Handbook. London: Sage Publications Ltd, 109-128.
• Jeffrey, P. & Pounder. J. (2000). Physical and Environmental Aspects. In: Roberts P and Sykes H (eds) Urban Regeneration A Handbook. London: Sage Publications Ltd, pp.86,108.
• KKTC Turizm ve Çevre Bakanlığı. (2018). Turizm Potansiyelinin Geliştirilmesi Mali Destek Programı. Access Address (11.12.2021): https://www.kei.gov.tr/cka-destekli-hibe-programlari
• Lichfield, N. (1998). Economics in urban conservation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Magalhães, C. D. (2015). Urban Regeneration. In J. D. Wright, International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences (pp. 919-925). Florida, USA: Elseiver.
• Mccarthy, J. (2004). Kentsel Dönüşümde Ortaklık Pratiği. In: Istanbul 2004 Uluslararası Kentsel Dönüşüm Uygulamaları Sempozyumu, Istanbul, Türkiye 27-30 November 2004, 99-107. Türkiye: Küçükçekmece Belediyesi.
• Menteş, A. (2023). Evaluation of the Adaptive Reuse of Ottoman Hans in the Walled City of Nicosia: Büyük Han and Kumarcılar Han. Günçe, K. & Kozlu, H. (Eds.). Architectural Sciences and Cultural Heritage- Historic Matter, 2023. Chapter: 7, 175-215. ISBN: 978-625-367-258-4. Iksad Publications.
• Menteş, A. (2015). Tourism-led Rural Regeneration in the Eastern Mediterranean: Conservation of Traditional Buildings, and Community Implications. (Unpublished PhD Thesis). Oxford Brookes University, Oxford.
• Mısırlısoy, D. & Günçe, K. (2016). Adaptive reuse strategies for heritage buildings: a holistic approach. Sustainable Cities and Society, 26, 91–98. Access Address (13.11.2021): https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2016.05.017
• Oktay, D. (2007). An analysis and review of the divided city of Nicosia, Cyprus, and new perspectives. GEOGRAPHY, 92(3), 231-247. Access Address (15.11.2021): https://www.researchgate.net/publication/235641155_Analysis_and_Review_of_the_Divided_City_of_Nicosi a_Cyprus_and_New_Perspectives
• Orbaşlı, A. (2000). Tourist in Historic Towns: Urban Conservation and Heritage Management. London: Taylor and Francis.
• Orbaşlı, A. & Cesaro. G. (2020). Rethinking management planning methodologies: A novel approach implemented at Petra World Heritage Site. Conservation and Management of Archaelogical Sites, 22(1-2), 93- 111.
• Orbaşlı, A. & Woodward, S. (2009). Tourism and Heritage Conseration. Jamal, T. & Robinson, M. (Ed). The SAGE Handbook of Tourism Studies. (p.314-332). ISBN: 9781412923972. London: SAGE.
• Özden, P. P. (2016). Kentsel Yenileme Yasal-Yönetsel Boyut Planlama ve Uygulama. Ankara: İmge Kitapevi Yayınları.
• Petridou, A. (2003). Nicosia Master Plan: A bi-communal initiative to change the image of the divided city of Nicosia. Access Address (11.12.2021): https://unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/thepep/en/workplan/urban/documents/petridouNycosiamasterplan.pdf
• Practical Guide. (2015). Enlargement and Integration Action. Access Address (11.12.2021): https://ec.europa.eu/neighbourhood-enlargement/system/files/2017-10/20151110_strategy_paper_en_0.pdf
• Priority Actions Programme. (2004). Guidelines for Urban Regeneration in the Mediterranean Region; Split. Barcelona, Spain pp.8-28.
• Racoviceanu, S. (2013). Analytical Report - including situation and revitalization needs analysis and recommendations on selection of pilot cities for the further development and implementation of revitalization strategies. Report, European Union, Crimean, May.
• Roberts, P. (2000). The Evolution, Definition and Purpose of Urban Regeneration. In R. Peter, & S. Hugh, Urban Regeneration A Handbook (pp. 26-53). London: SAGE Publications.
• Said, S. Y., Zainal, S. S. S., Thomas, M. G. & Goodey, B. (2013). Sustaining old historic cities through heritage-led regeneration. The Sustainable City, 179(8), 267-277. Access Address (12.12.2020): https://www.researchgate.net/publication/268192182_Sustaining_old_historic_cities_through_heritage- led_regeneration
• Tallow, A. (2010). Urban Regeneration in the UK. USA and Canada: Routledge. Access Address (11.12.2021): https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/mono/10.4324/9780203802847/urban-regeneration-uk-andrew-tallon
• Tanrıkul, A. & Hoşkara, Ş. (2019). A new framework for the regeneration process of mediterranean historic city centres. Sustainability 11(16): 1-19. Access Address (11.12.2021): https://doi.org/10.3390/su11164483
• Thurley, S., Walley, M. & Peace, L. (2013). Heritage Works: The use of historic buildings in regeneration. London: English Heritage.
• Turok, I. (2005). Urban regeneration: what can be done and what should be avoided?. In: Istanbul 2004 Uluslararası Kentsel Dönüşüm Uygulamaları Sempozyumu, Istanbul, Türkiye 27-30 November 2004, pp.99-107. Türkiye: Küçükçekmece Belediyesi.
• Tweed, C. & Sutherland, M. (2007). Built cultural heritage and sustainable urban development. Landscape and Urban Planing, 83(1), 62-69. Access Address (11.12.2021): https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2007.05.008
• UNDP(a) (2017). International Consultant – Final Evaluation of the Confidence Building Through Cultural Protection project. Access Address (12.12.2021): https://erc.undp.org/evaluation/evaluations/detail/8356
• UNDP(b) (2017). Town of Lipjan/Lipljan, a model for cultural diversity. Access Address (12.12.2021): https://www.ks.undp.org/content/kosovo/en/home/presscenter/articles/2017/02/14/town-of-lipjan-lipljan-a- model-for-cultural-diversity-.html
• UNDP(a)(2020). Project Engineer (LIF). Access Address (12.12.2021): https://www.unjobnet.org/jobs/detail/19207869
• UNDP(b)(2020). UNDP Cyprus. Access Address (12.12.2021): https://www.cy.undp.org/content/cyprus/en/home/about-us.html
• UNDP (2015). Productivity and Urban Renewal Jerusalem. Access Address (12.12.2021): https://www.ps.undp.org/content/papp/en/home/operations/projects/crisis_prevention_and_recovery/prod uctivity-and-urban-renewal-in-east-jerusalem--pure-.html
• UNDP (2019). UNDP Social and Environmental Standards. Access Address (9.01.2022): https://info.undp.org/sites/bpps/SES_Toolkit/SitePages/Standard%204.aspx
• UNDP Project Concept (no date). - Beautiful Crimea. Access Address (12.12.2021): http://www.undp.org/content/dam/undp/documents/projects
• UNDP-UNCHS (1984). Nicosia Master Plan Final Report. Report, United Nations, Cyprus.
• United Nation (2015). Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Access Address (12.12.2021): https://sdgs.un.org/2030agenda
• WCED (1987). Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development Our Common Future. Access Address (12.12.2021): https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/5987our-common-future.pdf
• Zetter, R. (1985). Nicosia. City Profile 2(1), 24. In Oktay, D. (2007). An analysis and review of the divided city of Nicosia, Cyprus, and new perspectives. GEOGRAPHY, 92(3), 231-247. Access Address (15.11.2021): https://www.researchgate.net/publication/235641155_Analysis_and_Review_of_the_Divided_City_of_Nicosi a_Cyprus_and_New_Perspectives